Daily News

Denver Stands Its Ground (6767)

Church Increasingly Called on to Defend Stance Against Homosexual Parenting

TEACHING MOMENT. Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput, speaking above at the archdiocese’s John Paul II Center for the New Evangelization, explained his decision to bar from archdiocesan schools students whose parents are living in ‘open discord’ with Church teaching.

– 2008 CNS photo/James Baca

WASHINGTON — After administrators of Sacred Heart of Jesus Catholic School in Boulder, Colo., discovered that a preschooler’s parents were lesbians, they declared that the child would not be able to continue in the school.

The lesbian couple was informed that their child would only be permitted to complete kindergarten, but not advance to first grade at the school. Both the Archdiocese of Denver and the pastor with direct responsibility for the parish school issued statements defending the Church’s position.

“Parents living in open discord with Catholic teaching in areas of faith and morals unfortunately choose by their actions to disqualify their children from enrollment,” said a statement issued by the Archdiocese of Denver.

“To allow children in these circumstances to continue in our school would be a cause of confusion for the student in that what they are being taught in school conflicts with what they experience in the home,” the statement continued.

As same-sex “marriage” slowly gains legal and social approval, opponents increasingly must address efforts to establish the moral and practical equivalence of same-sex couples with traditional unions that provide children with a mother and father.

In February, the Archdiocese of Washington failed to block the legalization of same-sex “marriage” in the District of Columbia, and elected to close its child-placement agencies that could not accommodate city contracts that incorporated a re-definition of marriage.

The Denver Archdiocese’s stance prompted a protest outside of Sacred Heart of Jesus Catholic Church March 7, and drew generally negative media attention. But the story confirms that the challenge posed by same-sex unions goes well beyond the issue of “marriage equality” to cover a host of related concerns that will require a more sustained, in-depth response from Catholic leaders.

Further, child development experts, who contend that children could suffer if society downplays the unique roles played by mothers and fathers, are eager to move beyond debates over religious freedom to address the basic needs of children — an issue various polls confirm to be a central concern of voters.

Same-sex “marriage” isn’t even legal in Colorado, yet Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver felt compelled to publicly clarify his policy for parochial school admissions. Subsequently, in a March 8 column posted on his archdiocesan website, Archbishop Chaput noted that Church teaching on marriage and sexual morality is “central to a Catholic understanding of human nature, family and happiness, and the organization of society.”

For the most part, the statements issued by the archdiocese and the pastor of Sacred Heart of Jesus Catholic Church in Boulder focused on the religious freedom of Catholic schools and challenged efforts to treat “the cultural interpretation of what tolerance has become as more important than the teachings of Jesus.”

“Our response has focused largely on religious liberty and tolerance because that is the way we are most being criticized,” acknowledged Jeanette DeMelo, director of communications for the Denver Archdiocese. “It is difficult to articulate the Church’s teaching on marriage, family and the meaning of sexuality in a sound bite. The teaching makes sense on a natural level but often it isn’t heard because the debate surrounding these issues is so hot.”

Media Sound Bites
The Denver Archdiocese’s response echoes similar themes raised by the Archdiocese of Washington during the public debate over same-sex “marriage.” The Maine same-sex “marriage” fight also stirred parental concerns about how a redefinition of marriage might influence public school curricula dealing with family life.
Scholars suggest that the growing divide between mainstream culture and Catholic teaching on the deeper purpose and value of sexual complementarity within marriage and family life has hamstrung the Church’s articulation of Christian anthropology.

David Schindler, the provost/dean of the Washington, D.C.-based John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family, observed that public ignorance of natural law precepts, combined with lay Catholics’ ignorance of ground-breaking developments like John Paul II’s theology of the body, have complicated the U.S. bishops’ task.

“Saying more than the culture understands turns the Church into a lightning rod,” said Schindler. Still, he argues that Catholics can’t allow media sound bites to govern the Church’s public response, unnecessarily restricting the full expression of Catholic teaching.

“It’s important for the Church to defend its position in a way that goes beyond claims of religious freedom, the right to conscience, and protecting the integrity of Catholic institutions. All of that is granted,” said Schindler, the Edouard Cardinal Gagnon Professor of Fundamental Theology at the institute.

“The dominant culture looks at this restriction of marriage as a millennial-old bias that has no roots in the nature of things. It seems very important that the Church take the occasion to show how the Church’s position is anchored in the roots of the human being,” he said. “Gender differences rooted in the body are embraced in the marriage between a woman and a man. This unity in difference between spouses in marriage is basic for the child’s gender identity and capacity to love in an integrated fashion.”

The Research
The narrow focus of the public debate has worried experts on child development who argue that the traditional family structure, for all its limitations, generally provides the most stable environment for raising well-adjusted, productive individuals.

“All the sociological and psychological science demonstrates that the gold standard for raising children is a home in which the mother and father are married and have low conflict,” said Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, who teaches “Psychological and Neurological Sciences: Gender, Marriage and Family” at the John Paul II Institute.

However, as homosexual rights activists press their case for marriage rights, a number of well-publicized studies suggest there are no substantive differences in outcomes for children reared by same-sex couples as opposed to those raised in traditional families.

In the February 2010 issue of the Journal of Marriage and Family, sociologist Timothy Biblarz of the University of Southern California’s College of Letters, Arts and Sciences and Judith Stacey of New York University concluded there were no gender-specific parenting abilities, with the “partial exception of lactation.”

But many experts in the field express skepticism regarding studies that seemingly contradict decades of social science research on the impact of family structure and the existence of innate sex differences.

Asked to comment on the contradictory positions issued by various scholars in the field, Dr. Michelle Cretella, a member of the board of directors of the American College of Pediatricians, pointed to an article posted on the ACP’s website.

“Children navigate developmental stages more easily, are more solid in their gender identity, perform better academically, have fewer emotional disorders and become better functioning adults when reared within their natural family,” states one ACP report, “Homosexual Parenting — Is It Time for a Change?”

“Studies that appear to indicate neutral to favorable child outcomes from homosexual parenting have critical design flaws,” says the ACP report. “Therefore, it is impossible for these studies to provide any support for the alleged safety or potential benefits to children from same-sex parenting.”

The ACP’s sober assessment is contested by scientists who dismiss the importance of gender differences within marriage and childrearing. Indeed, social research on these fraught matters has become a political football for activists on both sides, and ordinary laymen can find it difficult to navigate the thicket of contradictory conclusions.

Still, the ACP’s cautionary remarks serve as a further reminder that the challenge posed by same-sex “marriage,” and public confusion over the true importance of mothers and fathers in the home, require a more assertive presentation of Catholic and natural law principles governing marriage and family life.

The U.S. bishops, following the lead of Pope Benedict, have spoken repeatedly against same-sex “marriage,” most recently in their 2009 pastoral letter “Marriage: Love and Life in the Divine Plan.” As media pressure intensifies, however, the skills of individual bishops at communicating Church teaching in a clear and understandable way will be ever more pivotal.

As they strengthen their articulation of moral and social components of Church teaching, the bishops might find some allies among the many experts in medicine and neuroscience who have confirmed the strong relationship between gender, family structure, and the future happiness and stability of children.

Comments

I see this article quotes from the “American College of Pediatricians” which immediately brings it’s reputability in question. The American College of Pediatricians is run by two people (one may be a pediatrician) and it appears to have no members whatsoever. It is NOT THE SAME ORGANIZATION as the well respected American Academy of Pediatricians that counts THOUSANDS of pediatricians as it’s members.

The information shown on the “ACP’s” website is opinion and is NOT based on fact. They do not appear to have been involved with any studies of children at all, much less studies with children of gays and lesbians. Their “studies” do not appear to have been peer reviewed, a basic concept for ANY reputable study to insure it is not biased. That they came to the conclusion that gays and lesbians were unfit parents, comes as no surprise as that seems to be the presumption from the start, and they ONLY reason that this organization was founded based on review of their website.

On the other hand, the well respected American Academy of Pediatricians funded numerous studies and found that gays and lesbians raised kids that are virtually indistinguishable from those raised by heterosexual parents in EVERY WAY! But I’m sure you can’t trust those ACTUAL pediatricians…

Posted by Mike on Sunday, Mar 14, 2010 8:34 PM (EDT):

Dear Jamie,
You mentioned earlier that you are a devout Catholic, and I seek your advice on how to be devout. Why would you feel ashamed of being a devout Catholic? Did you mean to say that you feel humbled? If you have, I am glad to see that I can help you be more virtuous.
Regarding our individual lives, they are indeed unique in that they are not exactly identical. They are, however, very strongly related, as the Eucharist shows us. Moreover, the virtues that you practice can also help me strengthen my faith, and I would like to know what they are and how to exercise them.
This brings me back to my questions. How can you determine if you are a devout Catholic and how would you recommend that I improve my daily life or my prayer life?
I am also interested in a link to what Cheryl calls “your guru.”

Posted by Sam on Sunday, Mar 14, 2010 8:21 PM (EDT):

The comments on this board leave very little wonder that 60% of those under 25 have a very unfavorable view of the catholic church. That it’s leaders would seek out to discriminate against the children is reprehensible. The only reason they are doing this is to distract the world from the Pope’s involvement in pedophilia and child prostitution rings.

Where are the stories about that on this website? I see them everywhere else. Perhaps if the members of this “church” held their leaders to higher standards, you wouldn’t have to beat up on the gays so much.

Jesus included everyone at his table. I guess the catholic school has decided to be more selective than Him.

Posted by Paul on Sunday, Mar 14, 2010 6:09 PM (EDT):

Oh look, the church decided to throw some stones at two children in order rack up a few points against those gays! Awesome! Congratulations for damaging a few kids in order to advance YOUR agenda. It makes me feel sad as a catholic that my religion is being used for such hate.

PS. I’ve read a few of the posts, and there is not one thing that is “loving” about this situation.

Posted by Cheryl on Sunday, Mar 14, 2010 4:51 PM (EDT):

Straight out of the Leviathan: “NATURE hath made men so equal in the faculties of body and mind.”
(How does this differ from “Natural Law has basis in all humans having the same immutable nature?”)
Also, straight out of the Leviathan: “And because the condition of man (as hath been declared in the precedent chapter) is a condition of war of every one against every one, in which case every one is governed by his own reason, and there is nothing he can make use of that may not be a help unto him in preserving his life against his enemies; it followeth that in such a condition every man has a right to every thing, even to one another’s body. And therefore, as long as this natural right of every man to every thing endureth, there can be no security to any man, how strong or wise soever he be, of living out the time which nature ordinarily alloweth men to live. And consequently it is a precept, or general rule of reason: that every man ought to endeavour peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it; and when he cannot obtain it, that he may seek and use all helps and advantages of war. The first branch of which rule containeth the first and fundamental law of nature, which is: to seek peace and follow it. The second, the sum of the right of nature, which is: by all means we can to defend ourselves.”
You see, Hobbes considers one governed by one’s own reason, not by some unifying, objective “Natural Law.”. Yes, every man should seek peace. But, the peace to seek is that which is considered reasonable unto oneself, and is therefore subjective. This “peace” is different for every single human, and, according to Hobbes, “The notions of right and wrong, justice and injustice, have there no place.” Therfore, in obtaining one’s peace, one is entitled to be “doing anything which, in his own judgement and reason, he shall conceive to be the aptest means thereunto.” And, as such MY peace will not look like YOUR peace. But, we will indeed BOTH be at PEACE.

I would like to recommend that Archbishop Chaput meditate on the Gospels from this weekend’s Masses:Luke 18 and Luke 15. These parables challenge us to take a very different approach.
Brother Alan

Posted by adele on Sunday, Mar 14, 2010 4:06 PM (EDT):

People have been responding to this article for what seems to be forever. Most of the respondees are now responding more to other respondees’ views rather than to the article itself….time, dear Editors, to pull the plug.
The comments are becoming redundant and irrelevant in most cases. The Archbishop has spoken. Let’s accept his wisdom and revert to prayer for those affected most directly.

Posted by Cheryl on Sunday, Mar 14, 2010 4:02 PM (EDT):

>>Cheryl:“I can’t for the life of me figure how
Natural Law doesn’t begin with our all being the same by virtue of our
shared and equal humanity.”
Jamie: “Perhaps because it would no longer prove the point you want to make and would force you to actually consider other people instead of just yourself.”<<
How would Natural Law having basis in a shared humanity keep one from considering other people?

Posted by Ryan on Saturday, Mar 13, 2010 9:12 PM (EDT):

>>The catholic church requires that gays and lesbians repress their sexuality and live a life of celibacy. You can’t prove that is not what these women are doing, because you have no proof. That is their business, just like your sex life is yours.>>

Yes. Just as the Church requires a married man to live chastely, thus “repressing” any desire for another woman. Repression of disordered desires is a good thing. Just because we have an inclination, does not mean we are free to act on it with impunity. You are right in pointing out that we have no proof that they engage in homosexual sexual activity, though they are creating scandal by living together in an openly homosexual relationship as if they were married. This is a problem. As has been pointed out many, many times (without rebuttal I might add), WHY would they even send their child to a Catholic school and then protest when the school acts according to its moral precepts? Anyone? Beuller?

>>What’s so wrong with your house that you have to try to fix other peoples?>>

Normally I’d ignore this as ad hominim, but… Jamie, it is actually LOVE that compels us to stand up for the school and the Church and yes, even the right of the “parents” to not ask their child to experience such a contradiction on a daily basis.

Posted by Ryan on Saturday, Mar 13, 2010 9:03 PM (EDT):

>>And, Archbishop Chaput is leaving it their business. He is NOT letting them make it the schools business.>>

Excellent point.

>>It is not our right to force our religious views on others by denying them protection and rights under our laws.>>

Then don’t “impose” that belief of yours on the Church (see…your relativism is self-defeating). Also, no one is being “denied protection and rights”.

>>The school’s business is to educate and immerse in the Gospel whoever come to us for that.>>

Agreed. But how does the school do that effectively when what the child is taught at home contradicts its mission and purpose?

>>There is not,nor ever has been a test of faith for any parent who wanted a Catholic education for their children.>>

Yes there is, it’s called a willingness to work with the mission of the school and not against it, so as to actually, as you put it “immerse in the Gospel”.

Posted by Jamie on Saturday, Mar 13, 2010 4:41 PM (EDT):

Richard’s comment is factually untrue: “Research on same-sex unions demonstrate that they are markedly different from marriage in that exclusivity and permanency are not present or desired in the vast majority of these unions.”

Upwards of 60% of married heterosexual men and 40% of married heterosexual women ADMIT to cheating on their spouses. Research indicates that 80% of marriages will be affected in some way by infidelity of one or both of the spouses. 60% of first heterosexual marriages, 60% of second, and 75% of third end in divorce. These statistics have been confirmed by numerous studies including those done by the US Department of Health. Given those statistics any claim that “exclusivity and permanency” are present in heterosexual marriages is intentionally false, or completely ignores reality.

You might want to check those commandments again Richard. I think there is one against telling falsehoods.

Posted by Jamie on Saturday, Mar 13, 2010 2:26 PM (EDT):

“I can’t for the life of me figure how
Natural Law doesn’t begin with our all being the same by virtue of our
shared and equal humanity.”

Perhaps because it would no longer prove the point you want to make and would force you to actually consider other people instead of just yourself. I gave you examples of the ACTUAL natural laws as set forth by Hobbes. Perhaps you could google them. Maybe you don’t understand the word “challenge.” either.

Catholic families and educators need to understand is the danger posed to children by same sex unions. The Holy Father has written that to place such children in these unions does violence to them.

The Holy Father’s statement in supported by psychological and medical science. An extensive literature exists on the severe damage caused by fatherlessness in children. Deliberately depriving a child of a mother is even more traumatic to children.

In the Catholic Medical Association’s pamphlet on homosexuality, ‘Homosexuality and Hope’, http://www.cathmed.org the ,last statement relates to the danger to children from same sex unions.

Question: Should same-sex unions be recognized or treated as “marriage”?
Answer: Research on same-sex unions demonstrate that they are markedly different from marriage in that exclusivity and permanency are not present or desired in the vast majority of these unions. Same-sex unions suffer a significantly higher prevalence of domestic abuse, depression, substance-abuse disorders, and sexually transmitted diseases. Physicians should caution their patients about the dangers of same-sex unions and advocate against children being placed in such unstable relationships. The overwhelming body of well-designed research demonstrates that the healthiest environment for child development is a home with a mother and father who are married.[ii]

[ii] G. Rekers, “An Empirically Supported Rational Basis for Prohibiting Adoption, Foster Parenting and Contested Child Custody by Any Person Residing in a Household that Includes a Homosexually-Behaving Member,” St. Thomas Law Review 18.2 (2005–2006): 325–424.

Posted by Cheryl on Saturday, Mar 13, 2010 3:15 AM (EDT):

Here is an interesting tidbit – Father “Know It All,” as heard on Relevant Radio, once had religion teachers that were in a common-law marriage. When he found out, HE FIRED/RELEASED THEM. Where were the news crews and picketers then???? I never heard about this in the media!! Did you?
According to him, he fired them because they were not living what the church believes and teaches.

Posted by Cheryl on Saturday, Mar 13, 2010 3:00 AM (EDT):

>>>>“Posted by Jamie on Friday, Mar 12, 2010 8:41 PM (EST):No Cheryl, the definition of natural law is NOT that it “has basis in all humans having the same immutable nature.” I’ll challenge you to actually look it up. What you are talking about is Divine Law. It is based on the belief that there is a divine creator and some common moral compass that should be expressed in law.

I’m happy to discuss this with you in detail. But the simple fact is that America is not a theocracy, and therefore your divine law has no place in our society. It is not our right to force our religious views on others by denying them protection and rights under our laws. “<<<<<

I’m game. Send me a link to YOUR guru. I can’t for the life of me figure how Natural Law doesn’t begin with our all being the same by virtue of our shared and equal humanity.

Posted by Mary Carrell on Saturday, Mar 13, 2010 1:52 AM (EDT):

Thanks, Cheryl. Your response to Jamie’s latest posting was right on target. She is obviously a product of the post Vatican II dumbed down catechesis. It is so sad that so many Catholics are “in name only” because they have never received proper instruction in their faith. I am sure she sincerely believes what she posts. It seems to fit the definition of “invincible ignorance” but sadly, as I am sure you know,we learned that as applied to nonCatholics. Unfortunately, it applies to too many so called Catholics today.

The school’s business is to educate and immerse in the Gospel whoever come to us for that. There is not,nor ever has been a test of faith for any parent who wanted a Catholic education for their children. That is the Mission of Catholic education. Perhaps Bishop Chaput would understand if he read the Meditations of St. John Baptist De La Salle.
Brother Alan

Posted by Jamie on Friday, Mar 12, 2010 11:41 PM (EDT):

No Cheryl, the definition of natural law is NOT that it “has basis in all humans having the same immutable nature.” I’ll challenge you to actually look it up. What you are talking about is Divine Law. It is based on the belief that there is a divine creator and some common moral compass that should be expressed in law.

I’m happy to discuss this with you in detail. But the simple fact is that America is not a theocracy, and therefore your divine law has no place in our society. It is not our right to force our religious views on others by denying them protection and rights under our laws.

Posted by Cheryl on Friday, Mar 12, 2010 3:40 PM (EDT):

>>Jamie: “These women haven’t chosen their sexual orientation. The [C]atholic [C]hurch requires that gays and lesbians repress their sexuality and live a life of celibacy. “

They are WOMEN. THAT is their gender. That is the way God made them. They are choosing to live contrary to their God-given sexuality and nature. Desires can be disordered. Where do you think the devil can get his digs in? He cannot change God’s design; however, he can affect human desires. The Catholic Church, just as Jesus, encourages living a life without sin.

>>>Jamie:”That is their business, just like your sex life is yours.”<<

And, Archbishop Chaput is leaving it their business. He is NOT letting them make it the schools business.

Posted by Jamie on Friday, Mar 12, 2010 2:38 PM (EDT):

Mike. Our personal journeys are personal and each person must find their own path. I believe your comment is an attempt to shame me for my beliefs.

Posted by Cheryl on Friday, Mar 12, 2010 2:31 PM (EDT):

>>>>Jamie: ”It’s unfortunate that some would chose to post comments when they don’t understand what they are talking about…”

Hear, Hear!!!! I agree!!!

>>>Jamie: ”In this case, the term “Natural Law” is being used to indicate what people THINK that it means, instead of what it ACTUALLY means. In fact, application of Natural Law would REQUIRE marriage equality, not deny it.<<<

Oooooops. Jamie, did you lose your thought there? You started off so well.

Natural Law has basis in all humans having the same immutable nature. If some humans deny they have an immutable nature, i.e., their very gender (male OR female, there being no other), they have no recourse TO Natural Law.

Posted by Mike on Friday, Mar 12, 2010 2:15 PM (EDT):

Dear Jamie,
You mentioned earlier that you are a devout Catholic, and I sought your advise on how to be devout. You have not yet addressed my questions. Let me restate them.
1. How can you determine if you are a devout Catholic?
2. How can I become more devout? As I mentioned earlier, I try to
reinforce my Catholic faith with such practices as daily prayer
that includes the rosary, weekly Eucharistic Adoration, defending
my faith in public, and the more basic practices like regular
attendance of Sunday mass and tithing. What improvements would
you suggest that I make to my daily life or to my prayer life?
Thank you for your help.

Posted by Jamie on Friday, Mar 12, 2010 1:13 PM (EDT):

These women haven’t chosen their sexual orientation. Even the Pope agrees sexual orientation can’t be changed. It’s unfourtunate that the Catholic position is being intentionally misrepresented.

The catholic church requires that gays and lesbians repress their sexuality and live a life of celibacy. You can’t prove that is not what these women are doing, because you have no proof. That is their business, just like your sex life is yours.

What’s so wrong with your house that you have to try to fix other peoples?

Posted by adele on Friday, Mar 12, 2010 1:09 AM (EDT):

What would motivate a lesbian couple to place the children in their charge in a Catholic school environment, so opposed to the lifestyle they have freely chosen for themselves? Unless…they envisioned that it might just cause the kind of national attention it is receiving..and with the end result of school closure…and the end of the teaching they are so opposed to. It happened with Catholic Charities when in many major cities they were forced to close Adoption Agencies they had supported for decades
because they could/would not allow gay couples to adopt. Is it so far-fetched that the same future might befall Catholic schools? The Archbishop is to be supported and prayed for because he may be all that stands between the doors of the Catholic schools remaining open and their
closure.

Posted by Jamie on Friday, Mar 12, 2010 1:09 AM (EDT):

It’s unfortunate that some would chose to post comments when they don’t understand what they are talking about (@Daniel P. Harrigan). In this case, the term “Natural Law” is being used to indicate what people THINK that it means, instead of what it ACTUALLY means. In fact, application of Natural Law would REQUIRE marriage equality, not deny it.

Following are a few examples of “Natural Law.”

* The first Law of nature is that every man ought to endeavour peace

* The second Law of nature is that a man be willing, when others are so too, as far forth, as for peace, and defence of himself he shall think it necessary, to lay down this right to all things; and be contented with so much liberty against other men, as he would allow other men against himself.

* The ninth Law is that every man acknowledge another for his equal by nature.

* The tenth law is that at the entrance into the conditions of peace, no man require to reserve to himself any right, which he is not content should be reserved to every one of the rest.

It is ridiculous that people would continue to cite “Natural Law” as a reason to deny rights to their fellow citizen that they choose to keep for themselves.

It continues to be difficult for me to understand why Catholics think that preaching hatred of another human and causing them harm is more important than showing them the love, compassion, and understanding that Jesus himself taught us.

Posted by Ryan on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 11:31 PM (EDT):

“Marriage Equality”? I’ve never understood this argument. What’s not already equal? A homosexual man and a heterosexual man already both have equal rights. They may both marry a woman. Both are (in most states) denied the same (equal) thing, namely, to marry another person of the same sex. There is nothing “unequal” about states which prohibit same-sex “marriage”. The same laws apply to everyone.

May any man marry any woman? Yes, hence “equal”. May some men marry men while some may not? No, hence, equal. May any man or woman marry an animal, or a couch, or a grapefruit, or a spider, or a basketball, or a car, or three women, or a minor without parental consent, or (fill in the blank)? No, hence, “equal”.

Posted by Ryan on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 11:23 PM (EDT):

If you have attempted to argue any of the following, you have missed the point:
“it’s discrimination”
“It’s ‘hate’”
“what about other sins?”
“the Church hates gays”
“education is all about making choices for ourselves”
“it’s punishing the children”

Catholic schools see themselves as an extension of the primary educators of children…parents. It would be confusing (and cruel) to children to teach things that are in direct conflict with people they live with and love. It would also be confusing for the child when their parents undermine the authority of the Church and the very foundation of the school in the home. As such, the bishop has wisely decided that another school may sit better with the child’s home experience. What happens when the school has a parents day? Or a father-daughter dance? It has NOTHING to do with hate, discrimination, or punishing the children. I think this was a prudent decision that actually ALLOWS both parties to continue to live more consistently with what they believe the truth about the nature of marriage and family (and education) to be. This is actually love, not hate; respect for one’s freedom, not “imposing values.”

Maybe a better question is, “if you believe the Church is so wrong about the very nature and foundation of family and education, why on Earth would they even WANT their child to attend the school?” I run into this all the time as a teacher at a Catholic high school, parents who want the school to deny its very mission and foundation to suit their individual lifestyle. In fact, we have a number of teachers who do not share and/or live the faith but are in some cases antithetical to it. Why they continue to work there is beyond me.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church: “Every sign of unjust discrimination in their (homosexuals)regard should be avoided.” Yes, let’s fully support the teaching of the Church!
Brother Alan

Posted by David on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 9:15 PM (EDT):

My 2nd grade child came home from CCD class a few weeks ago and told us about a youngster in her class that has 2 mommies. While I’ve seen the women and i would not be surprised if this were the case, this provides a lot of questions. Does the religious intruction coordinator know about this situation? Does the parish priest? Do other parents? What if the child invited my child to say a birthday party? How can the “mothers’ recieve the sacraments? I could go on. I do not think the child should be punished for any reasons. But I think its very selfish of the “mothers” to put these children in this situation. They demand a right to be “married”. Marriage is a Holy and Divine sacrament between a man and woman to bring about children to share in Gods love. Why don’t they just make up their own unique legal union and call it something else but don’t expect the Catholic church to recognize it as anything similar to Holy Matrimony.

Posted by jo jo on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 8:55 PM (EDT):

maybe its the parents who are actually preventing the child from attending the school by not being open minded about the possibilties of the sinful nature of homosexuality. It’s sounds like the “parents” have closed their mind to even considering why the bible teaches homosexuality as a grave sin.

Posted by jo jo on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 8:50 PM (EDT):

Marriage is about procreating-can’t have that with two dudes or women. The only thing that brings is deviant sexual behavior.

Posted by L.E. on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 8:41 PM (EDT):

Finally, the fundamental difference here is the fact that illict marriages may be amended, annulments may be granted, adultery can end and reconciliation can come, parents’ opinions and actions can be changed, but nothing can make these two women into a woman and a man. A sinful opposite-sex marriage can be amended, but a same-sex one can never be, as it is completely opposed to church teaching in all facets.

Posted by L.E. on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 8:33 PM (EDT):

The church is a place of sinners, but ones who are called to repentance and a change of life in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. This is a case of outright defiance of church teaching and persistance in said sin. That applies to all parents, not just to these particular ones. The difference here is that this outright defiance of church teaching and persistance in said sin is observable by the naked eye. One cannot pick contracepting or adulterous parents out of a crowd simply by looking at them.

Posted by Daniel P. Harrigan on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 8:22 PM (EDT):

To those it may concern, I fully support my Church and its decision. If you don’t like its rules, doctrines,or moral laws there is over 36,000 denominations you can choose from. If you don’t like those you can become Buddhist,Hindu or some other religion. The reason you don’t like the Church’s teachings is you no longer have any grounding in natural law or philosophy. No society has accepted same sex couples as the norm. Now we are supposed to because we are enlightened. This society has become so ignorant of basic truths it has lost its moral moorings and has jettisoned basic family mores. Now its a free for all. I personally will follow Christ and his church. 2,000 years of wisdom and truth versus hedonistic confusion and moral degeneration. Even Cicero talked of natural law and knew it was not possible to usurp. Come home to Rome and submit to Jesus’ gentle yoke. God Bless you all.JMJ

Posted by Mary Carrell on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 8:17 PM (EDT):

Jamie, you say “I am a straight, married woman. A devout catholic. I support marriage equality.” Marriage equality is not what you think it is. By definition, which goes back thousands of years, marriage is a union of a man and a woman. Two people of the same sex may be granted a civil union legally in those countries that permit it, but they will never be “married”. And you need to look up the meaning of “devout Catholic”. I suggest you find a source that is not politically correct. It is obvious that you are a devout daughter of our post Christian culture and not the Church. I highly recommend the Catechism of the Catholic Church. In it will you find the truth and it will set you free from this culture of ours. And pay attention to Bishop Chaput. He is a blessing to us all.

Posted by James on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 6:39 PM (EDT):

I’d be interested to know whether this school denies entrance to the children of parents who are remarried without an annulment. According to Catholic teaching, such parents are living in a state of defiant and perpetual adultery.

I’m also curious, given the Church’s belief that salvation is only through the Catholic Church, whether it opens admission to the children of “Hell-bound” Jews, Protestants and others.

Nah, they just hate the queers.

Posted by Jennifer O. on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 5:11 PM (EDT):

Jamie, studies don’t matter in this instance because they’re not really at the heart of the issue here. What we are dealing with is the freedom of a religion to freely practice its beliefs vs. individual rights, privileges, and entitlements. Though I must say I don’t have an opinion regarding this particular occurrence between the Catholic school and the child of a lesbian couple yet, some of the questions I have had about it are as such. Was there any other option for the school? Did they discuss the enrollment requirements with the women and try to find any other possible solutions to prevent the child from being harmed by either the school or the actions of the women to enroll the child there? Does a private institution have the right to discriminate? What does the Constitution mean when it says “freedom to practice religion”? When rights clearly contradict each other, which right trumps the other? Should government be regulating marriage? Should government be regulating the practice of and beliefs of religion? Should the government regulate thought control? If so, where do we stop regulating? Is regulation of thoughts and beliefs even viable and effective? The answers to these questions would eventually have an effect on every organization and institution, so it’s really important to explore all the possible answers and how they might infringe on our own freedoms we enjoy. An honest person would admit that the Catholic Church is the favorite punching bag right now for many. And the attempts to make Her into something they find more palatable and in line with the secular beliefs of the times are endless. But I don’t see any one ever asking the question of “should we be doing this or that to Her?” because of the unintended consequences of our actions. People seem to be just so frothing at the mouth like a pack of wild dogs circling for a kill sometimes when it comes to the RCC. (just look at how the anti-RCC people post exhaustively on this website when the articles involve homosexuality, abortion, or contraception) I personally am for personal responsibility, subsidiarity and solidarity. I don’t believe I have a right to not be offended or to the fruits of another person’s labors. (Good thing too, cause if I did I’d be in a tizzy right now trying to figure out how to silence all the posters bashing the RCC here on this website.) But I digress, we need to approach this with a level head and exercise the virtue of Temperance if we are going to find a way make a pluralistic society work. I know I can’t convert everyone. I think it would be arrogant to think so, look at Christ, many did not listen to him. But they need to learn we aren’t going away either, and the secular world has to find a place for us in this country to practice our beliefs freely too. If they don’t they’ll be exposed for fraudulently espousing freedom of religion.

Posted by G Gummersheimer on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 4:37 PM (EDT):

I want to echo what TShaffer said, I hope they are going through and checking the status of all the “traditional” married families and making sure that they are all in VALID Church marriages. If they are not, should not those children also be removed from the school?

Posted by John Westmeier on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 4:31 PM (EDT):

Many of the issues that I have with the attitude of the Bishop and school officials are addressed in some of the comments above; therefore, I will not spend time rehashing what I see is non-Christian attitudes and behavior. Imagine the “sins” of the parents being heaped upon the children.

A statement with which I have serious objection is the statement that allowing the children to continue beyond kindergarten would create confusion for them since the teaching the receive in school would conflict with what they experience in their families. That is pure poppycock. What is the purpose of education—-to expand the knowledge and awareness of the person(s) being taught so that they can make rational (something that seems to be missing in the diocesan explanation) and informed choices for their own lives. Perhaps, if the bishop and his minions believe what they say, to leave children in a situation perceived as sinful without an attempt to educate the child about other options. The diocese is participating not only in discriminatory behavior, but borders on hate-mongering.

My advice: choose a true educational institution so that your horizons can be broadened instead of being stilted through the ignorance of those providing the “goosestepping” teaching.

Posted by Mike on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 4:02 PM (EDT):

Dear Jamie,
How can you determine if you are a devout Catholic? I fall short in so many ways that I find I need the sacrament of Penance every week. I doubt that I can call myself devout.
I try to reinforce my Catholic faith with such practices as daily prayer that includes the rosary, weekly Eucharistic Adoration, defending my faith in public, and the more basic practices like regular attendance of Sunday mass and tithing. What improvements would you suggest that I make to my daily life or to my prayer life?
Thank you for your help.
Mike

Posted by Sue Whittaker on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 3:09 PM (EDT):

“To allow children in these circumstances to continue in our school would be a cause of confusion for the student in that what they are being taught in school conflicts with what they experience in the home,”

I think many of the above respondents did not read the quote above. When my children were in Catholic grade school (early 1960) many protestants sent their children there under the condition that they stay for the religion class, so that they would not feel any different than the other children. That was fine because Christian teaching is the same in Christian churches. But to teach against homosexual lifestyles, and have children of homosexual parents in the classroom, would be an injustice to those children. That is what the Catholic Church does not want to do. Why are the respondents above twisting things around or getting their dander up about their church teachings. It is all very simple, if you would read the quote again. Sue Whittaker

Jeff on March 10:
I agree with you. I too support the teachings of the Church, but refuse to cast stones. Most Catholic schools would have to close if we demanded that the parents be free of sin before enrolling their children. What will confuse the child is the rejection of the bishop. I am so glad that no Catholic institution ever rejected me becuase my parents weren’t perfect.
Brother Alan

Posted by carol on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 1:56 PM (EDT):

God bless Archbishop Chaput!
He does not compromise (water-down/sugar-coat) the TRUTH.

Posted by Jamie on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 1:43 PM (EDT):

Studies can NOT be construed to prove any point. They can be misrepresented to prove any point. In this case, there are decades of peer reviewed studies that time and time again prove that gays and lesbians are as good at raising children as their heterosexual counterparts. You can put your fingers in your ears and recite scripture all you want, but this is conclusively proven repeatedly. The only thing that you are proving by claiming that gays and lesbians aren’t fit parents is that you are irrational.

Before making judgements about things you know nothing about you should get all the facts. Repeating tired and incorrect arguments proves nothing.

I am a straight, married woman. A devout catholic. I support marriage equality.

Posted by TShaffer on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 1:41 PM (EDT):

I’m against this simply because it’s a double standard. I know three divorced people, each living with an unmarried partner, whose children attend Catholic schools. If we are to hold gay people accountable because they are openly living in sin we should hold everyone to that same standard.

Posted by Mary Carrell on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 12:52 PM (EDT):

Yes it is true that studies can be constructed to prove anything and “experts” are not always what they seem. I remember when the American Psychologial Association got this ball rolling many years ago with their pronouncement that homosexuality should not be classified as abnorrmal. Up until then we were taught it was a psycholigical disorder with various developmental causes. Well, the press and culture ran with it and we have gotten to the point we are at in our society today which is most unfortunate. The most interesting point to know is that it was later revealed that those in charge of this “expert” professional organization were…you guessed it…a group of homosexuals. So much for unbiased professional opinions. I am most edified by Bishop Chaput and the Church in Colorado. You are good and faithful servants. You will be vilified and persecuted. But you are doing God’s work. Be encouraged and know that the faithful are praying for you.

Posted by Fred on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 10:23 AM (EDT):

So God is very clear on this subject. God is merciful, but calls on us all to repent. I’d be suspicious of the favorable studies on homosexual parenting; we need to look no further than the recent global warming hoax, the real facts suggest the contrary. Homosexual activist will not be happy until we sever our relationship with God…Romans 1:26 Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, 27 and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity. 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper. 29 They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips 30 and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents. 31 They are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

I teach in a Catholic school. We have many students who come from less than ideal homes, and we do not discriminte against them. Why punish the children?
Brother Alan

Posted by Michael on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 8:43 AM (EDT):

Part of the dignity (änd purpose) of traditional marriage is that children come from within that union. What homosexual couple can do that? With all due respect to the child conceived, extra-partner relations (“adultery” in real marriage situations) are inherent to that kind of relationship. Likewise, a homosexual union isn’t the most reputable carrier of marital fidelity. Children notice things much more than we might give them credit for, so saying such things have nill effect can’t really be justified.

Posted by Michael on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 8:34 AM (EDT):

If it is a clear thing that one-parent families produce in most cases unwanted “defects”, for lack of a better term, in the child or children (be it from divorce or from extramarital relations), can a “double one parent” family work more? Think about it. Obviously, I say this with all due respect; many of my classmates came from one-parent homes, so I’m not reducing their value in the least.

Posted by Mac on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 8:28 AM (EDT):

Judging merely by consequences (“children of lesbians…”), even if those studies were somehow or in some degree correct, they can’t justify the inherenltly misdirected behavior it wants to defend. If killing people Jefferey Daumer style were to make that person somehow “happier”, would we want to promote that? This is an extreme example, but the principle doesn’t change. Now, should we try to help people with homosexual tendencies to come to the truth (yes, there is such a thing)? Absolutely. Clarifying without helping doesn’t help in the end, either!

Posted by Mark on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 6:03 AM (EDT):

“I just read a study that found that children of lesbians were generally better adjusted, had better grades, and made more money than children of heterosexuals. They studied over 500 children for 20 years. I guess the school was afraid that the children of the lesbians would show all those other children up. “

Philip, May i ask you where did you find that study. I grew up in the black community and its sad many children in my community grew up without fathers because many are in jail. This is about NAtural Law and the Purpose in Marriage. THERE IS A CRISIS OF MARRIAGE IN THE BLACK COMMUNITY AS WELL. TWO THIRDS OF BLACK CHILDREN GREW UP WITHOUT FATHERS.

Posted by Gregory on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 4:21 AM (EDT):

Actually, God does choose sides in that He has given us a blueprint for right vs. wrong. God will choose sides again at the Last Judgment. God does create us all equally in so far as He has given us the freedom to learn and choose right from wrong. He does not script us to decide. That would not be mutual love, which He desires, but totalitarian. Though His prophets and Jesus, God teaches that: any sexual relations outside of marriage of man and woman are mortal sin; that, though we are all sinners, we are called to admonish sinners in order to try and save their souls from eternal damnation (Hell); that homosexual tendencies and acts are contrary to the Natural Law (how and why God made us—-anatomically, physiologically to procreate to perpetuate His children [humans] whom He loves) and therefore, are sinful. Consequently, we are also called to pray for homosexuals and assist them to remain chaste, in order to provide them with an opportunity for eternal happiness (Heaven). Any homosexual relationship is, at the very least, the near occasion of sin, just as co-habitation of unmarried heterosexuals. The Good News for all of us (sinners) is that if we repent with the intention of avoiding sin and its near occasion (and therefore are in a state of grace) before we die, we have a pretty good chance of making it to the promised bliss of Heaven rather than burning in Hell. God promised us. This life is but a speck of sand on the beach of eternity. And eternity is a very long time. In this case, the children, unfortunately, are the political footballs in a simple game of right vs. wrong, Good vs. Evil. The choice is pretty simple; perhaps hard to admit and/or implement, but simple.

Posted by Cheryl on Thursday, Mar 11, 2010 2:26 AM (EDT):

>>“Same-sex “marriage” AND regular, good-ole TRADITIONAL marriage will NEVER be equal. Nature and Nature’s God have designed it thus, and no amount of ‘human-made’ law nor public opinion can change that.”

Good, if it will never be equal in your mind, you won’t care if we change the laws to allow equality. THANKS for your SUPPORT!<<<

Nope. Not up to me. Designed by Nature and Nature’s God. That is the problem - the TRUTH cannot be changed by man’s laws. The Truth remains.

“Right is right, even if nobody does it. Wrong is wrong, even if everybody is wrong about it.”-GKC

Posted by JeffreyRO5 on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 11:31 PM (EDT):

I think the right response was for the Catholic school to ASK the lesbian couple if they objected to moving their children to a non-hate-based school. That would have been the more Christian way to handle this. And I wonder if this school screens other parents for biblical and church conformity: not using birth control, not being divorced, not having committed adultery or having had pre-marital sex, etc. My guess is, they don’t. Non-gay sinners welcome; gay sinners? Not so much.

Posted by Mike on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 11:23 PM (EDT):

To Rightthingtodo TX
There is already room in the front pews. Please join us on Sunday.
To Flanoggin
I doubt that the school is teaching about marriage in first grade,
but perhaps my doubts are unfounded. It is more likely that the
school found out about this situation recently and decided that the
student could no longer remain in the school system. If the student
were removed later, he would have to sever friendships that he had
forged over many years. This is probably the least traumatic
situation for him. What do you think?
To Jessica
I would like to suggest a number of spelling and grammatical
corrections to your previous post. They will help you communicate.
Just as you ask that we listen to ourselves, please do so yourself.

Posted by Rachel on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 10:24 PM (EDT):

There are studies that can prove almost anything, aren’t there? And groups will line up to both fund the studies and support them. However, it remains a truth that what is right is not always popular and what is popular is not always right.

Posted by garry on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 8:43 PM (EDT):

I am not catholic but I like the fact that the catholic school has banned this child and took this stand. You are fighting a spirit of perversion here, they would not have settled for school they would have kept pushing for other things if you allowed the child to attend.
They automatically hate church people, they think anyone who does not like gays are religious wackos.
If you notice from the quote from the bible , the sodom example… the men came from all over the city , young and old .
Note : ALL THE MEN, ...ALSO NOTICE —-They were threatening Lot for the 2 angels,who came as men. THey wore themselves out looking for the door after they were blinded. Who would do that unless you were pretty perverted?

QUOTE:
All the men – both young and old, from every part of the city of Sodom – surrounded the house. 8 19:5 They shouted to Lot, 9 “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so we can have sex 10 with them!”

Out of our way!” 16 they cried, to Lot..You came to live here as a foreigner, 17 and now he dares to judge us! 18 We’ll do more harm 19 to you Lot than to them!” They kept 20 pressing in on Lot until they were close enough 21 to break down the door.

19:10 So the men inside 22 reached out 23 and pulled Lot back into the house 24 as they shut the door. 19:11 Then they struck the men who were at the door of the house, from the youngest to the oldest, 25 with blindness. The men outside 26 wore themselves out trying to find the door.

Posted by Jeff on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 8:14 PM (EDT):

I would be interested to hear from people who support the Catholic Church’s position on homosexuality and gay sex, but disagree with the decision in Boulder. I happen to agree with both.

Posted by K. Bernadette on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 7:58 PM (EDT):

“Saying more than the culture understands turns the Church into a lightning rod,”

I love it. That really is the crux of the issue, the Church’s teachings on sex and marriage are so highly (divinely) enlighted that the vast majority of those who live by the flesh just can’t grasp it.

We who live by the Spirit will not back down on this issue.

Posted by Jamie on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 7:15 PM (EDT):

“Same-sex “marriage” AND regular, good-ole TRADITIONAL marriage will NEVER be equal. Nature and Nature’s God have designed it thus, and no amount of ‘human-made’ law nor public opinion can change that.”

Good, if it will never be equal in your mind, you won’t care if we change the laws to allow equality. THANKS for your SUPPORT!

Posted by Philip on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 7:13 PM (EDT):

I just read a study that found that children of lesbians were generally better adjusted, had better grades, and made more money than children of heterosexuals. They studied over 500 children for 20 years. I guess the school was afraid that the children of the lesbians would show all those other children up.

Posted by jessica on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 6:26 PM (EDT):

do you ever listen to yourselves when you talk and i do mean the other comments on this article(no offence to the people who think this was a stupid case of catholism). catholics have every right, are you kidding me? no one has the right but god and god doesnt pick sides. everyone is equal wether your gay straight or lesbian. schools shouldn’t be able to kick children out cause their parents are lesbian. It doesnt make a difference whether you have been raised by lesbians or a straight family, we are all the same and catholics are a disgrace to real believers of the faith. to the family that has been disgraced cause your family to the catholics are a danger to their faith, ignore them, and come to the united church side. we don’t take sides, we will welcome anyone no matter wat you are.

Posted by Cheryl on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 6:25 PM (EDT):

>>“When marriage equality becomes a reality for all relationships in colorado and the rest of the US…”<<
Same-sex “marriage” AND regular, good-ole TRADITIONAL marriage will NEVER be equal. Nature and Nature’s God have designed it thus, and no amount of ‘human-made’ law nor public opinion can change that.

Posted by Flanoggin on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 6:01 PM (EDT):

The catholics have every right to decide who does and does not go to their schools. I am troubled, however, why they are teaching about same-sex-marriage in first grade——

Posted by Rightthingtodo TX on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 5:47 PM (EDT):

amen (pun intended)

the cc and any other private institution has every right to discriminate and kick out members of its institution who violate the rules

my guess is that the parents are doing three things right now:
1. looking for a new religion or even better yet getting sane and ditching religion altogether
2. realizing that their child is better off getting kicked out of a hateful environment
3. realizing that it’s good this happened now instead of in 3-4 years by which time the brainwashing would’ve taken effect

When marriage equality becomes a reality for all relationships in colorado and the rest of the US, at least there’ll be room in the front pews.

Posted by d scott on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 5:11 PM (EDT):

It is about time Roman Catholics hang tough. Watering down the Faith has not worked, it must be clearly defined to be respected for what it stands for.

Posted by Paul on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 3:46 PM (EDT):

This statement from the article is FALSE: “The narrow focus of the public debate has worried experts on child development who argue that the traditional family structure, for all its limitations, generally provides the most stable environment for raising well-adjusted, productive individuals.”

Current research shows that children with gay and lesbian parents do not differ from children with heterosexual parents in their emotional development or in their relationships with peers and adults. It is the quality of the parent/child relationship and not the parent’s sexual orientation that has an effect on a child’s development. Contrary to popular belief, children of lesbian, gay, or transgender parents:

Are not more likely to be gay than children with heterosexual parents.
Are not more likely to be sexually abused.
Do not show differences in whether they think of themselves as male or female (gender identity).
Do not show differences in their male and female behaviors (gender role behavior).

Based on these findings from scientific research, the following medical and professional organizations support parenting by gay and lesbian couples.

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Bar Association
American Medical Association
American Psychoanalytic Association
American Psychological Association
Child Welfare League of America
National Adoption Center
National Association of Social Workers
North American Council on Adoptable Children

Posted by d scott on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 3:23 PM (EDT):

Hang in there!!! It is the right thing to do if Roman Catholics are to be taken seriously.

Join the Discussion

We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words.
By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines.
Comments are published at our discretion. We won’t publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words.
Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.